Tag Archives: Obamacare

Post navigation

Featured

Those of us born in the first half of the “Baby Boomer” generation will remember the television weekly series, “Combat!” It was set in World War II France as the Americans fought the Germans. Like most programs of that era, short snippets from an episode were used in brief promotions during the week.

The one which stands out featured a night battle scene where Sergeant Saunders (played by Vic Morrow) was giving instructions to an overwhelmed soldier, both covered in mud and sweat. As the sergeant finished his orders, the soldier said, “I’ll try.”

Saunders sharp comeback was, “Don’t try, you DO IT!”

Fast forward to 2017, where a two-plus year Republican majority in both houses of Congress has had several years to plan a strategy to deliver us from Obamacare. The two leaders, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), seem to be rolling out more versions of doomed legislation with their apparent concern being that they can say they tried rather than they were relentless in the critical pursuit of victory.

The threats of the Axis powers then and Obamacare now are similar in their impact on daily life. Had Germany, Italy and Japan been victorious, our freedoms that are guaranteed (not given) by the Constitution would have been scuttled. Allow the ironically named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to continue much longer and the free enterprise medical world crashes in the U.S. when too many insurers pull out of markets and middle-America is smothered by premiums covering many more than just their own families. Thus, the original intent of our previous President will be realized as a frantic majority will plead for “single-payer health care” (also known as socialized medicine) where big government decides what health care is given to whom. This will complete the liberals’ process of trivializing human life to a commodity to be managed like crops and minerals – the same philosophy of the Axis leaders.

To Mr. McConnell, Mr. Ryan and the rest of the Republican controlled Congress:

Featured

In response to the recently released Senate version of Obamacare replacement, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said:

“These cuts are blood money,” Warren said on the Senate floor. “People will die.” More specifically, Warren added that “Senate Republicans are paying for tax cuts for the wealthy with American lives.”1

She was a member of the Congress which implemented Obamacare – the plan which increased premiums to unfathomable heights (married couple with no children at home in Ohio with moderate coverage and high deductibles pays $1,700 per month). The plan has absurd requirements causing insurers to leave many counties and states, thus decreasing competition (and we know what that does to prices). This is the plan which Rep. Nancy Pelosi famously said that we would have to pass it in order to learn what’s in it, and we have regretted the result.

Sen. Warren is all up in arms about the proposed health plan which might force Congress to move public health insurance assistance from the backs of average Americans to a sensible federal plan where the burden is distributed fairly. (This does not mean going to socialized medicine, the “single payer” program which Obamacare had in mind after it deliberately destroyed our private insurance system, a goal well on its way to realization.)

All of this outrage from a member of the party which promotes the killing of babies (59 million victims since Roe v. Wade)2 and a disciple of President Obama who, as a senator, would not vote against the horrific practice of late term abortion.

We can’t take her or the rest of the hypocritical Democrats seriously.

What’s all the fuss about? All former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani said this week was that the emperor doesn’t have any clothes. This has been evident for any reasonable person during the last six years.

Actually, what he said was:

“I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America,” Giuliani said during the dinner at the 21 Club, a former Prohibition-era speakeasy in midtown Manhattan. “He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”1

Benghazi

Where shall we begin? Regarding the President’s childhood and mentors, much has been written. It has taken an Indian immigrant, Dinesh D’Souza, to understand the key aspects of his upbringing and education leading to the President’s decision-making. I leave that research to the reader.

As with most attempts to reason with die-hard followers, we turn to history first for similar examples. In 1974, President Nixon resigned from office because of his cover-up of the Watergate break-in which others engineered. In addition to being illegal, his actions were unbelievably senseless as he was protecting an election victory which was assured. However, as the head of the executive branch of our government and as a protector of the Constitution, it was necessary that he give up his position.

The current occupant of the White House (since not naming one’s adversaries is in vogue) tried to deflect responsibility from his administration’s inactions which led to the murder of four members of our embassy in Benghazi. Unlike Nixon, he was in the latter stages of a close re-election bid where the tragedy exposed the fallacy of his campaign comments that such enemies were on the run. Were his actions illegal? I don’t know. But it is obvious that his response indicated a greater love of his aspirations over the lives of fellow countrymen.

Nixon, too, exhibited greater concern for his desire to be re-elected over what was moral. Although no one died from his actions, he had to go. It would be in the best interests of our nation if history were to repeat itself. Score one for the former mayor.

IRS

Nixon had his “enemies list” and Obama has (his) IRS target opponents of his vision for America. The former “had these enemies targeted for tax audits or trailed by private detectives, and hired the “plumbers” to stop leaks.”2 For President Obama, we have “Despite the government’s refusal to release over 800 pages of Lerner communications, some documents that have been released show that she was discussing the targeting of conservative groups with members of the DOJ two years before the IRS even admitted that its actions were improper.”3

I’ll admit, there could be a difference in these situations. Obama may not have been quite as directly involved as Nixon.4 However, this makes him innocent as crime bosses are because they don’t carry out most crimes themselves.

Almost forgot about Nixon’s famous eighteen minutes of missing tapes from the Oval Office. Sort of pales when compared to thousands of IRS emails and documents either lost, some perhaps recovered and other documents not released for proper investigations. Truly a man who loves his country.

Obamacare

Yes, the American public is very tired of this issue by now — and so are our checkbooks. After all, the President only “grubered” the citizenry with the well-known lies about being able to keep your insurance and that it would cost less. Forget the fact that to stop the flow of red ink to their bottom lines, employers have had to cut workers or reduce their hours. Ignore the reality that the President joined forces with a mortal enemy of his, the insurance companies (that is, big business) to promise them that they would have to cover only ¼ of their losses. He dumped ¾ of the shortfall on the duped public.5

One more thing. The misleadingly named “Affordable Health Care Act” was trumpeted from its beginning as not being a tax on the American public.6 But presto! When the Act was pleading for its life before the Supreme Court, the Court accepted the government’s argument that it was a tax.7 You only lie to the ones you love?

Federal Deficit

While campaigning in 2008, candidate Obama declared President George W. Bush to be unpatriotic because the federal deficit has increased from $5 trillion to $9 trillion during his watch.8 Our debt has doubled to $18 trillion during Obama’s administration. If Bush was unpatriotic, what does that make Obama?

“Miscellaneous”

There are many other examples proving Mr. Giuliani’s assessment of our President’s attitude toward the United States. We have seen executive orders to make changes to Obamacare when the only legal way to do this is through Congress. His way, not the constitutional way.

There’s the Court overruling his attempt to bypass Congress with appointments to the NLRB with when Congress was officially in session. Papa Barack knows best.

With racial tensions as they are, we don’t need Al Sharpton or Rev. Jeremiah Wright to stir things up. We can rely on our chief executive to suggest “Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago”9 or his failure to truly calm the explosive situation in Ferguson, Missouri.10 Keep this turmoil going everywhere. A frazzled citizenry can’t constantly focus on all of the attacks within our country, a la Saul Alinsky.11

Conclusions

Is President Obama the Anti-Christ? Not likely, but the real one would marvel at his ability to have lies accepted as truth and his masterful embellishing of half-truths.

Is President Obama a Muslim? No, even though he doesn’t follow basic Christian precepts in his governing and seems to favor Islamic political goals. Even though he ignores Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visits as well as his warnings about Iran and generally acts in a way to allow terrorism to do it wants against Israel and the western world? The President doesn’t take any religion seriously (see his references to “freedom of worship” instead of “freedom of religion”12). More importantly, it’s likely he believes the Israelis are occupying land which is not rightfully theirs, so whatever accomplishes the goal of dispersing them is OK with him.13

Does Obama love our country? Well, this week, his administration revealed to the whole world how the U.S. plans to retake Mosul… Don’t just stand there, Democrats, contact Health and Human Services for some clothes to give to our emperor before he freezes to death. Yes, Mr. Giuliani speaks the truth.

4 – “Embattled IRS official Sarah Hall Ingram made 155 visits to the White House to meet with a top Obama White House official with whom she exchanged confidential taxpayer information over email…Of Ingram’s 165 White House meetings with White House staff, a staggering 155 of them were hosted by deputy assistant to the president for health policy Jeanne Lambrew, according to a June Watchdog.Org analysis of White House visitor records…The White House recently took down visitor logs recording details of these meetings, citing the government shutdown.” From”IRS, White House officials that shared confidential taxpayer info had 155 White House meetings,” by Patrick Howley, http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/10/irs-white-house-officials-that-shared-confidential-taxpayer-info-had-155-white-house-meetings/, 10/10/2013

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents — #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.” From ”Obama in ‘o8: Bush’s debt ‘unpatriotic,’” by Peter Wehner, https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/08/24/obama-2008-bush-debt-unpatriotic/, 8/24/2011

10 – “According to Obama, the frustrations about what happened in Ferguson “have deep roots in many communities of color who have a sense that our laws are not always being enforced uniformly or fairly. That may not be true everywhere…but that’s an impression that folks have and it’s not just made up. It’s rooted in realities that have existed in this country for a long time.” [Emphasis added.]” … “President Obama had a grand opportunity to talk about the fairness of our criminal justice system, which despite its faults, is an equitable system that ensures the due process rights of those accused of breaking the law. It was an ideal time to discuss the deeper cultural, behavioral problems that exist in the black community.” From “What Obama and Holder Should Have Said About Ferguson Grand Jury Verdict,” by Hans von Spakovsky, http://dailysignal.com/2014/12/06/what-obama-and-holder-should-have-said-about-ferguson-grand-jury-verdict/, 12/6/2014

11 – from Rule #8 in “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, “Keep the pressure on. Never let up. Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.” Found in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard and possible Republican candidate for president, pointed out the contradiction in one of the Democrats’ traditional criticisms of the Republican party. In a recent speech in Iowa she said:

“Liberals call us the party of big business, but then, they continue to increase the burden and the complexity of taxes and regulations until only the big and the powerful and the wealthy and the well-connected can survive.”

In an interview by Martha MacCallum on Fox News yesterday, she continued describing the plight of small businesses:

“Seventy per cent of small business owners describe government as ‘hostile’ to them. We are now destroying more businesses than we are creating for the first time in U.S. history.” She reminded the viewers how detrimental this is to our economy as “small businesses create 2/3 of new jobs.”

… But wasn’t the Obama Era, now in its seventh year, supposed to reverse the severe recession caused by the supposedly insensitive Republicans and their greedy comrades?

This Administration is Making a Habit of Catering to Big Business

In addition to creating an environment which is toxic to small businesses, we must also recall the President pulling a 180-degree on his party’s anti-big business philosophy when it came to Obamacare. He guaranteed the insurance companies that the American public would bear the brunt of ¾ of their losses as a result of the new health care law.1 Remember, these are big companies. These are the same ones which are viewed by the Democrats’ as their enemies when it comes to social policy.

And let’s not forget Common Core. While not officially an Obama project, it is being pushed along through Race to the Top money, etc. courtesy of the Department of Education.2 In this social engineering experiment, millions stand to be made by textbook and other producers of educational material and tests. Of course, there’s additional money to be made as “Dozens of the nation’s top CEOs will meet to set the plans for a national advertising blitz that may include TV, radio, and print.”3 Don’t expect any “Mom-and-Pop” companies to receive a significant piece of this.

CONCLUSION

Looks like the only hope for the little guy in 2016 is that the Republicans defeat the Democrats, the real Party of Big Business.

1 – Not only that, but “As Laszewski explains, Obamacare contains a “Reinsurance Program that caps big claim costs for insurers (individual plans only).” He writes that “in 2014, 80% of individual costs between $45,000 and $250,000 are paid by the government [read: by taxpayers], for example.”

“In other words, insurance purchased through Obamacare’s government-run exchanges isn’t even full-fledged private insurance; rather, it’s a sort of private-public hybrid. Private insurance companies pay for costs below $45,000, then taxpayers generously pick up the tab—a tab that their president hasn’t ever bothered to tell them he has opened up on their behalf—for four-fifths of the next $200,000-plus worth of costs.” From ”Bailing Out Health Insurers and Helping Obamacare,” by Jeffrey H. Anderson, http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/bailing-out-health-insurers-and-helping-obamacare_774167.html, 1/13/2014

There is no other alternative. And this comes from someone with no party affiliation.

With a change in the Senate’s majority, we will have both houses of Congress under the watchful eye of those who respect our Constitution. It will be easier to thwart the President from using his infamous pen to do everything from appointing NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) members illegally to unconstitutionally changing laws without the consent of Congress.1,2

The Democratic Party, the current Senate majority, acts as if human pregnancy is a disease which is implied by Obamacare. As such, it rationalizes that human life may be arbitrarily ended at any time before birth under the guise of “reproductive rights” instead of the murder which is actually taking place. This party prides itself on being the champion of the oppressed, yet it is willing to deny the basic freedom of the right to life from which all other freedoms and social programs arise!3

Our nation has also witnessed new lows regarding the basic right of religious freedom during the Obama Administration. At one time, the wisdom of George Washington’s exhortation in his farewell address was self-evident in that “reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” Now, many are oblivious to the dangerous shift to “freedom of worship,” prominent in the President’s and in Hillary Clinton’s speeches.4 In other words, you can keep your religion, just confine it to the church buildings. Now that’s doubly worrisome.

Obamacare provides an example of this rationale. The act which requires employer-sponsored insurance to cover contraceptives (and abortifacients) has “religious exemptions.” Thus, some are allowed to skip this part – so long as they sign an agreement permitting a third party to implement within their organizations what they find morally objectionable. It’s a classic “we won’t force you to drive your car for the bank robbery, just say you agree to have someone else drive your car for this.” Sure, that’s OK.

We can continue to allow Sen. Harry Reid, or possibly another dutiful disciple of the President in the next Congress, to sit on a pile of legislation passed with bipartisan support and designed to put renewed vigor into our chronically sluggish economy, or we can put a Republican majority in the Senate and dare President Obama to veto what the United States needs.5,6

Thirty-four states will decide thirty-six Senate seats this coming Tuesday. They will choose either “The Pen and a Phone” or the Constitution and the philosophy which formed it.

3 – “The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation (emphasis is in the original:
‘The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin…’
‘The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined…’” – from paragraph 2273 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Liguori Publications, Liguori, MO, 1994 (with imbedded quotations from Donum vitae which were included in the paragraph)

Early last week on Fox News, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey was interviewed by Jenna Lee. The subject was Congress’ extended debate over whether the President had the authority to order that drones hunt down an American who is working with Al Qaeda and who is believed to be planning attacks against the United States.

Mr. Mukasey commented that the leaking of this information to the press was likely giving the intended target advanced notice to hide, neutralizing the hard work in tracking him. But the overriding issue was does the President or any other government official have the authority to order such a killing? It has already occurred twice, without judicial process, causing considerable outrage on both the left and the right.1

Background

Last March, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) gave a 13-hour filibuster during the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director. The senator’s long speech was not directed as opposition to Mr. Brennan himself, but at the continuing unanswered question regarding President Obama’s legal authority to kill a U.S. citizen on our soil with a drone strike. He began his filibuster with, ““I rise today for the principle, that Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco, or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Kentucky, is an abomination.”2

In the weeks prior to this, Sen. Paul and others had not received satisfactory answers to this question of authority. Among the group of Brennan-Obama-Holder being asked, it was Attorney General Eric Holder who was the most specific. The quoted article put it this way, “While allowing that Obama has ‘no intention’ to blow up an American within the 50 states, he could ‘conceivably have no choice’ but to do so in an extreme emergency, akin to the September 11 or Pearl Harbor attacks.”2

In fact, the reference to Rand Paul’s suggestion that it could lead to the killing an American “sitting in a café” occurred earlier in the same day of his filibuster when Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex) had asked Holder whether that would be legal. Holder replied, “No.”2 But when Rand Paul was unable to receive a “comprehensive” statement from Holder that ““the drone program will not kill Americans who are not involved in combat,” it led to his filibuster.2

Mukasey’s Incorrect Diagnosis of Rand Paul

Thus, it was Senator Paul’s more famous use of the statement which the former Attorney General took issue with. Mr. Mukasey’s comments on Fox News last week:

“Rand Paul is a joke. He’s afraid that if we kill Americans abroad who are plotting to and have killed other Americans and who are in a place, who can’t be captured, that we are then going to use drone strikes on coffee houses. He’s actually concerned about that?” After which he said that Sen. Paul “needs clinical help” for believing this.

Does Mukasey Actually Trust President Obama With this Kind of Power?

Mr. Mukasey went on to say that a drone strategy could work and it requires “somebody to analyze the situation, take action and take political responsibility for it.”

First of all, it must be pointed out that Sen. Paul’s comments (and Sen. Cruz’) are what is known as “hyperbole.” The Free Dictionary explains hyperbole as being: “A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.” The senators may not be of the opinion that the President would do such a thing.

And, the former Attorney General could have been using the same tactic to describe Sen. Paul. It still boils down to the Mukasey position that a president’s authority to use drones against U.S. citizens need not be feared.

After all, why would someone not trust a leader who:

1) kept promoting his health care bill vigorously by saying it was not an additional tax and when he knew that people could very well not keep their doctors and that our already suffering employment situation would take another hit from it… and his Administration salvaged part of a Supreme Court challenge by arguing that Obamacare IS a tax

2) protects those who go after his political enemies by proclaiming in a nationwide interview that there’s not a “smidgen’ of corruption within the IRS – when the investigation is far from over and early evidence points to the contrary3

3) repeatedly tried to dismiss the Benghazi murders as not an act of terrorism, when they were confirmed to be such by several U.S. intelligence groups, because he was in a tightly-contested election and had been reassuring the American public that “Al Qaeda is on its heels” in order to prop up his record4

4) who tried to appoint members to the NLRB when Congress was blocking him with the legal tool that they were in session during a form of recess, thus, he was later overruled by the courts

5) invested significantly in mutual funds which had holdings in companies known for outsourcing jobs as well as having invested in private equity… while he was criticizing Mitt Romney during the campaign for investing in companies which outsource U.S. jobs and in private equity.5

6) used executive orders improperly to make changes in the Affordable Health Care Act, which can only be legally done by Congress (and misuse of “affordable” in the name of his signature legislation should be considered criminal, too)

So, Mr. Mukasey still believes we have no reason to fear the executive branch having the authority to use drones to kill Americans whom are viewed as a threat to the U.S?

But, in his defense, maybe he wasn’t taking Senators Paul and Cruz image of the café seriously. They were only using hyperbole. The President is trustworthy, just look at his record… then again, maybe they weren’t.

1 – “Target an American with drones?” by Peter Bergen, CNN National Security Analyst, 2/11/20142 – “Rand Paul, John Brennan and the Exploding Cafe Scenario,” by Michael Crowley, www.swampland.time.com, 3/6/20133 – Many of the aggrieved parties had not been given the opportunity to speak before Congress when this statement was made and former Director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner had sent an email to several legal counsels within the IRS saying that her division would have to work “off plan” to reduce the granting of tax-exempt statuses then later invoked the 5th Amendment when interrogated about her involvement in this case.4 – “Al Qaeda’s Not as Battered as Obama Thinks,” by Daniel Byman, www.newrepublic.com, 11/29/20125 – “Obama has investments in companies which ship jobs overseas,” by Philip Klein, www.washingtonexaminer.com, 7/17/2012 and “Despite Criticisms, Obama’s Investments Share Similarities with Romney’s,” by Daniel Halper, www.weeklystandard.com, 8/25/2012

One of the topics of this morning’s “First Take” show on ESPN had Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless discussing the Dallas Cowboys’ recent addition of an offensive coach who would be in charge of passing plays. Both of them expressed incredulity at the never-ending parade of bad moves for one of the country’s seemingly most popular teams, even though it continues astonishing under-performance. When Stephen A. had his turn, it was striking to this blogger how similar the Cowboys’ ownership and lack of accomplishments mirror the Obama presidency.

Cowboys and Obama are Primarily Hype

Stephen A. on Cowboys owner Jerry Jones: “He’s a hype machine personified – nothing more.” This is not the first time we’ve heard him say that about Jones.

Our president came to mind immediately. His first claim to fame was his work as a “community organizer.” There has always been a great disparity in the opinions of what he actually accomplished. But we do know that Mr. Obama voted “present” 129 times in the Illinois state Senate1 and couldn’t even bring himself to vote against the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion.2

Of course, the Administration will tout the fact that the nation’s unemployment rate is down to 6.7%, but disregard the lowest employment participation rate in decades.3 They also ignore that underemployment is still a serious problem.4 The nation’s economic “recovery” is greatly overrated – just ask the average guy on the street.5

Decisions with Multiple Negative Consequences

As Skip pointed out, the Cowboys made their most recent big mistake by: 1) hiring a non-descript college coach 2) putting him in a position which has been designed to infringe on the head coach’s authority, thus rightfully making him unhappy.

In the U.S. parallel, Obama made his own mistake with much larger and triple negative consequences. He continues to push his (Un)Affordable Health Care Act and has put the IRS in charge of enforcing it. The first consequence of this ill-advised move was a very dissatisfied populace because it was lied to by the President. He promised that if we liked our current insurance, we could keep it. It has since become apparent that he knew that this would not be the case.6 Consequence #2: it was made more painful in that he never warned us that premiums would increase substantially for so many. Consequence #3: is that we have an untrustworthy organization (the IRS which likes to target political enemies) in charge of the health care industry which represents one-sixth of our economy! Now, that’s reason to be unhappy.

Each Has Trouble Spending Money Wisely

Last year, Jerry Jones gave his starting quarterback, Tony Romo, an amazingly lucrative contract. It is “a six-year, $108 million contract extension with $55 million in guarantees and a $25 million signing bonus.”7 His 55-38 regular season record and 95.6 passer rating are all well and good. However, there’s this little problem of his 1-3 record as a starter in the playoffs plus an 0-3 record when a playoff spot was on the line.8

Our form of government is supposed to have checks and balances which would prevent one branch from dominating the other two. However, President Obama acts more like Quarterback Obama (that is, a quarterback who won’t listen to his offensive coordinator and ignores his head coach). And while many are sure that he simply cares about the little guy, along with mom-and-pop companies like General Motors and the health insurance industry, there’s this little problem of a $17 trillion federal deficit to which he has contributed greatly. But just like Mr. Jones’ supporters, many of Obama’s cheerleaders deny that our federal government has a spending problem.9

Perhaps, General Manager and would-be owner Obama is hoping these distractions will make us forget his deliberate lie about what instigated the Benghazi murders. It was repeated by his office staff to protect his claim that Al-Qaeda was retreating in order to protect votes in his close re-election bid.10 This is not even addressing the increasing concern that, despite damage to their economies and infrastructure, Iran and Syria are not helping to form a less volatile Middle East region.

To Sum it Up

As Stephen A. Smith said this morning, “The Dallas Cowboys are a joke! Your record says you stink, but you get a billion dollar playpen.” Plug in “Obama Administration” for “Dallas Cowboys” and “trillion” in place of “billion” and you have the true state of the union as we head into tonight’s address… If only Obama‘s decisions would result in as good a record as Dallas’ mediocre and perennial 8-8, we’d be much better off.

1 – while “just” 3% of the approximate 4,000 votes he cast while in office, from “The New York Times (Dec. 20, 2007): Sometimes the “present” votes were in line with instructions from Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few cases, the issue was politically sensitive.” And from the same article, “If you are worried about your next election, the present vote gives you political cover,” said Kent D. Redfield, a professor of political studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield. “This is an option that does not exist [in] every state and reflects Illinois political culture.” Taken from www.factcheck.org, 9/25/2008

2 – “According to a lobbyist for Illinois NOW, Susan Bramlet Lavin, the Planned Parenthood strategy in Illinois was for its politicians to vote “present” because it provided political cover, yet acted as a “no” vote. Obama twice voted present (no) on Partial Birth Abortion Ban Acts. He also voted present twice against Parental Notification of Abortion Acts, twice against laws to protect live-born children of abortions, and he even voted against a bill defining “born-alive infant” to include infants “born alive at any stage of development.”
Obama liked this strategy, and the Illinois branch of Planned Parenthood gave him a “100 percent” pro-choice voting rating for good reason. From “The Planned Parenthood President: Obama’s obsession with abortion,” by Paul E. Rondeau, www.communities.washingtonpost.com, 10/15/2012

3 – “Some economists question the falling unemployment rate from the beginning of the year, explaining that the work force participation rate, the portion of adults who are working or actively looking for work, has fallen to its lowest level since 1978… The participation rate for workers aged 16 to 54 dropped drastically during the recession and not yet recovered, indicating that retirements don’t entirely explain the situation, according to The Post.” from “Joel Naroff: Why This Economic Recovery Is So Slow” (quoted sections were not made by Joel Naroff), by Michael Kling, www.moneynews.com, 11/19/2013

4 – from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (through the 3rd quarter 2013, next update will be on January 31, 2014): “In addition to the marginally attached, who are included in U-5, involuntary part-time workers are included in U-6. The larger the difference between the U-5 and U-6 measures, the higher the incidence of this form of “underemployment.” California and Oregon posted the largest gaps between their U-5 and U-6 rates, +7.0 percentage points each. North Dakota registered the smallest difference between its U-5 and U-6 rates, +2.3 percentage points, indicating a comparatively low degree of involuntary part-time employment.”
However, this data does not include full-time workers who are making much less than their qualifications suggest probably because such a measure, while illustrative of the poor recovery, would be considered prone to subjective error.

5 – Despite long-trusted official indicators to the contrary, the number of those who approve the way the President is handling the economy is below 40%. Perhaps these indicators no longer reflect accurately the real overall condition of the economy in the same way “unemployment rate” is failing to account for enough. Only the statistic was taken from “Obama’s Puzzle: Economy Rarely Better, Approval Rarely Worse,” by Jackie Calmes, The New York Times, 1/27/2014

9 – “So, it is almost a false wrong to say we have a spending problem. We have a deficit problem that we have to address. Right now, we have low interest on the national debt and it’s a good time for us to act to lower the deficit.” Quote from Nancy Pelosi in an interview with Chris Wallace, 2/10/2013, www.nation.foxnews.com.

10 – … instead of protecting U.S. citizens. “Obama Says The War on Terror Is Over and Al Qaeda Says…” by Larry Kelley, www.dcclotheslines.com, 6/7/2013